Balancing Stealth vs Combat

[Sacred_Path]

So your entire problem is, someone said that this game will take cues from Baldur's Gate, and you interpreted that to mean that there will be kill XP. And helmets will protect you from critical hits. And you will be able to spam that rest button. And now that you've realized this might not be the case and that noone ever promised you the latter, your disappointment makes you unable to see the advantages of any new systems.

[PrimeJunta]

"I don't mind that it's not going to be D&D, as long as it's exactly like D&D in every detail." Right.

[TRX850]

One of the things we've only touched on is the party changing their preferred tactics on the fly as conditions change. It may ultimately have no bearing on exploitative behaviour, but as we've discovered, you should never underestimate the whimsy or stubbornness of players. It's the reason there are so many excellent Solo/Roleplay/Powergaming "Let's Play" series' on YouTube for games like BG/IWD/NWN and a zillion others.

 

People play for their own reasons, and each playthrough is different. I personally like the roleplay/discovery style on the first playthrough, and then over the course of a year or two, I may work my way up to powergaming and optimize the living bejesus out of every decision I make. Then play solo. Then apply mods if they are available. And when I want a dose of nostalgia, I'll reinstall everything and go vanilla.

 

Sometimes I find myself shouting at the LP video (well, not literally) demanding they go back and pick up the gems they so blatantly left behind, or those magic arrows, or not to bother killing that peasant because their reputation will drop. It drives me nuts. Then the next day, I'm ok with it, and I continue watching the LP. Because ultimately, it's a great adventure, and the micromanagement and tedium of some tasks is always always always outweighed by an immersive, timeless classic.

[Helm]

"I don't mind that it's not going to be D&D, as long as it's exactly like D&D in every detail." Right.

So your entire problem is, someone said that this game will take cues from Baldur's Gate, and you interpreted that to mean that there will be kill XP. And helmets will protect you from critical hits. And you will be able to spam that rest button. And now that you've realized this might not be the case and that noone ever promised you the latter, your disappointment makes you unable to see the advantages of any new systems.

You apparently can't tell the difference between fundamental cRPG mechanics (for IE style tactical combat based games) and D&D rules. I wouldn't be surprised if really thought that combat xp was only used in D&D games.

 

Both of you must have also been ramming your head into the monitor because of the "annoying" combat in the IE games. Real hard too.

Edited January 18, 2013 by Helm

[TrashMan]

XP for cow-tipping? I'd like to see the animation for that, if nothing else.

 

More like cow-killing. You would punch it till tifalls down...then you'd continue punching till it died.

altough I guess you coudl stop and bandage it. Not that it needs bandaging - punches don't cause bleeding.

But way to train your medical skill.

 

I guess the biggest gripe some have with Learn-By-Doing is that a guy that wants to max his sneaking skill will sneak around everywhere and level that skill up fast.

But I don't really see a big problem with that..if the guy trains and spends so much time on it, what's exactly wrong with it?

 

I guess you can put a cap, so it will only increase to a certain level with regular training, and to increase further you have to sneak around actual enemies (not pesants).

Or you can make it that only correct usage grants skill XP (so sneaking near pesants gives you nothing)

[Jobby]

I have to admit i think learn by doing is unlikely, however was it to be implemented a possible way to cap it would be to have mentors/teachers (like Arcanum) where you could only raise a skill to a certain level before you had to seek out a mentor to advance it further, these usually involved some kind of interesting skill related quest. 

 

By placing these mentors in locations that may be harder to get to for weaker lvled characters you could make a reasonably balanced system using this, as a point of note i think the mentoring system would be quite good for any xp system not just learn by doing.

[Kissamies]

fundamental cRPG mechanics

Nah, I think "formalized" is a better word for it. It's been around so much that people have come to expect it, no matter if it is actually a good mechanic or not.

[TRX850]

IE games have always had a combination of quest XP and kill XP.   Instead of removing one or the other, can't we "refine" both?

 

I believe this is what PrimeJunta, myself, and others were onto yesterday.

 

Edit:

 

It's like quests can now receive a "glancing blow".

Edited January 18, 2013 by TRX850

[Valorian]

Kill XP is quite simple and refined enough.

 

If you kill a creature whose challenge rating/level is above your level you'll get additional XP.

If you kill a creature whose challenge rating/level is below your level you'll get reduced XP.

[TRX850]

I was nearly going to suggest that perhaps in certain cases, where double-dipping would tear a hole in the fabric of space-time, that an enemy's CR was set to 0, overriding its real value.

 

Although, even this smacks of a workaround.

[Helm]

IE games have always had a combination of quest XP and kill XP. Instead of removing one or the other, can't we "refine" both?

 

I believe this is what PrimeJunta, myself, and others were onto yesterday.

 

Edit:

 

It's like quests can now receive a "glancing blow".

PJ does not want combat xp at all. No refining, no adapting, nothing. He just wants it gone and is really stubborn about it.

 

Read the little "conversation" I had with him on the first page and check the "degenerate gaming" thread.

Edited January 18, 2013 by Helm

[PrimeJunta]

IE games have always had a combination of quest XP and kill XP.   Instead of removing one or the other, can't we "refine" both?

 

I believe this is what PrimeJunta, myself, and others were onto yesterday.

Nope, I want to get rid of kill XP as a systemic reward. (In fact, I would get rid of all systemic rewards. Rewards should always be explicitly placed.)

 

You can still assign it to specific critters, of course, if you want to incentivize killing them. You would probably want to let the player know that you've done that though, even if it isn't through a formalized quest.

Edited January 18, 2013 by PrimeJunta

[Valorian]

PJ learned a new word (systemic) and now wants to get rid of anything attached to it.

 

 : How cute.

 

 

Guys, you need to understand that a few people (PJ included) are not arguing against kill xp because they dislike kill xp. They're arguing against it because the overlord suggested he's going to design the game without it; so now it's all about proving how this is THE BEST thing to do.

[TRX850]

You can still assign it to specific critters, of course, if you want to incentivize killing them.

Isn't that "refining" kill XP though? Even if only a little?

 

I think "specific critters" needs to be expanded upon and worked into the equation more in that case.

[TRX850]

PJ learned a new word (systemic) and now wants to get rid of anything attached to it.

 

 : How cute.

 

 

Guys, you need to understand that a few people (PJ included) are not arguing against kill xp because they dislike kill xp. They're arguing against it because the overlord suggested he's going to design the game without it; so now it's all about proving how this is THE BEST thing to do.

Even overlords have been known to change their minds.

 

But, I will ultimately get behind whatever system is put forth I suppose.

[PrimeJunta]

Isn't that "refining" kill XP though? Even if only a little?

Semantics. The way I've been using it, "kill XP" is a systemic feature: the system automatically rewards you for XP whenever you kill a creature. Objective XP is XP explicitly placed somewhere by the designer. There's no rule that says that designers aren't allowed to award objective XP for killing particular critters.

 

I think "specific critters" needs to be expanded upon and worked into the equation more in that case.

I do not understand what you mean by this.

[PrimeJunta]

Guys, you need to understand that a few people (PJ included) are not arguing against kill xp because they dislike kill xp. They're arguing against it because the overlord suggested he's going to design the game without it; so now it's all about proving how this is THE BEST thing to do.

I've been running D&D campaigns on and off for about 25 years. I stopped awarding kill XP about 15 years ago. So no, that's not the reason. I'm just glad that game devs are finally seeing the light too.

[Valorian]

 

Isn't that "refining" kill XP though? Even if only a little?

Objective XP is XP explicitly placed somewhere by the designer.

> 

 

Pumpkin, kill XP is also explicitly placed somewhere by the designer, by placing creatures that can be killed.

[Valorian]

 

Guys, you need to understand that a few people (PJ included) are not arguing against kill xp because they dislike kill xp. They're arguing against it because the overlord suggested he's going to design the game without it; so now it's all about proving how this is THE BEST thing to do.

I've been running D&D campaigns on and off for about 25 years. I stopped awarding kill XP about 15 years ago. So no, that's not the reason. I'm just glad that game devs are finally seeing the light too.

Good, but a computer game is an entirely different beast than your tabletop games with a few people.

[PrimeJunta]

Pumpkin, kill XP is also explicitly placed somewhere by the designer, by placing creatures that can be killed.

Tell me, Valorian, do you actually enjoy playing a game like a rat running in a maze, obsessively hunting for locks to pick, traps to disarm, and goblins to kill? I'm just curious.

Edited January 18, 2013 by PrimeJunta

[Amentep]

Amentep, you're going to explode from all the conjecture.

 

Throwing rocks around as a tactical option during sneaking to put it on the same complexity level as combat? Come on..

 

 

If you don't/can't lose health or die while sneaking, as a direct consequence of sneaking, it will always be inherently more advantageous than combat.

 

And if you do lose health while sneaking.. Why the hell would you lose it?

 

Note that a trap can maim you regardless if you choose to sneak or not.

 

I'm not sure why health is the "be all / end all" of resource management.  If a rogue uses as many stamina potions to get through a stealth path to equal the same cost a combat path has in health & stamina potions where is the difference in cost between the two?

 

Tactical options in sneaking could include - distraction, path finding, timing of movement, understanding guard movement patterns, spotting for secret paths, searching for low visibility areas.  But there could be a whole lot more; just as there are games built solely on combat there are entire games built entirely on the complexity of stealth.  I'm not sure why you seem to think stealth has to be "press a button and win".

[Valorian]

 

Pumpkin, kill XP is also explicitly placed somewhere by the designer, by placing creatures that can be killed.

Tell me, Valorian, do you actually enjoy playing a game like a rat running in a maze, obsessively hunting for locks to pick, traps to disarm, and goblins to kill? I'm just curious.

Do you play like that, like a rat running around in a maze, obsessively hunting for locks to pick, traps to disarm, and goblins to kill, when the reward for each of those actions is XP?

 

Because I don't. I take my time and enjoy the game.

 

If you can't control yourself and go on a rampage each time you sniff xp, that's not my problem, nor the problem of kill xp. It's your brain's problem.

[TRX850]

Tell me, Valorian, do you actually enjoy playing a game like a rat running in a maze, obsessively hunting for locks to pick, traps to disarm, and goblins to kill? I'm just curious.

Without any sarcasm or insincerity, I ask, as long as the game provides a super wonderful awesome gaming experience (which I believe it will), why does it matter so much that players can choose to run around like mice in a maze, AS WELL AS enjoy a super wonderful awesome gaming experience?

 

If they want to, let them. That's about half a million in dev funds saved, right there.

[Valorian]

 

Amentep, you're going to explode from all the conjecture.

 

Throwing rocks around as a tactical option during sneaking to put it on the same complexity level as combat? Come on..

 

 

If you don't/can't lose health or die while sneaking, as a direct consequence of sneaking, it will always be inherently more advantageous than combat.

 

And if you do lose health while sneaking.. Why the hell would you lose it?

 

Note that a trap can maim you regardless if you choose to sneak or not.

 

I'm not sure why health is the "be all / end all" of resource management.  If a rogue uses as many stamina potions to get through a stealth path to equal the same cost a combat path has in health & stamina potions where is the difference in cost between the two?

The difference is stamina regenerates on its own, health does not.

[Amentep]

 

 

 

 

Amentep, you're going to explode from all the conjecture.

 

Throwing rocks around as a tactical option during sneaking to put it on the same complexity level as combat? Come on..

 

 

If you don't/can't lose health or die while sneaking, as a direct consequence of sneaking, it will always be inherently more advantageous than combat.

 

And if you do lose health while sneaking.. Why the hell would you lose it?

 

Note that a trap can maim you regardless if you choose to sneak or not.

 

I'm not sure why health is the "be all / end all" of resource management.  If a rogue uses as many stamina potions to get through a stealth path to equal the same cost a combat path has in health & stamina potions where is the difference in cost between the two?

 

 

The difference is stamina regenerates on its own, health does not.

 

 

 

And if stamina regeneration is heavily penalized for stealth actions forcing the player to use more resources or lose time vs a combat path, where is the difference between the two?

 

Here's the bottom line - I still don't believe that the developers in wanting to create more ways to play the game so that combat isn't the optimal path (stealth and diplomacy really were combat tactics in the old IE games; there was no reward in using them in any context outside of combat related benefits) that they'll make combat a less valid path (or even a lesser path). They will find a way to balance the paths so that the expenditures - while necessarily unequal - are still equivilent.

 

Now I say this because we don't have much to go on but there stated intentions and I acknowledge the idea of creating unequal paths is a possibility. I think where most of our disagreements come in are whether we (a) see the possibility as a high probability and (b) whether we think it is possible to balance the paths (I think is it possible; since you seem to reject any attempt to add costs to stealth that would put it on par with combat (while being different), I'm assuming you don't.)

 

And maybe it can't; I'm not convinced but once we have better information about what they're actually implementing, I'm willing to change my mind.